Assessing multidimensional complexity in home care: congruencies and discrepancies between patients and nurses

Abstract

Background Person-centered care allows for the inclusion of the totality of a person’s needs and preferences, beyond just the clinical or medical aspect. This approach requires the development of tools to allow for the integration of the patient in his/her healthcare. Based on a 30-item tool developed for nurses to evaluate the complexity of home care situations (COMID), this study proposed a version for the patients (i.e. COMID-P). Both instruments were used, independently by nurses and patients, to rate the complexity of individual situations, in order to compare ratings. Methods The COMID-P and the COMID were completed during the fraXity study at the patients’ homes, independently by patients (aged 65 and over) and nurses. Item-level and scale-level analyses were performed using, Kappa and McNemar tests, and intra-class correlation (ICC). Results A total of 159 pairs of COMID and COMID-P ratings were retained for analyses. Results demonstrated a high degree of patient/nurse agreement for 12/30 items, a moderate agreement for 10/30 items, and a low degree of agreement for 7/30 items. The intra-class correlation between the COMID-P and the COMID was high (ICC= .826, 95%CI [.761-.873]). Conclusions The results demonstrate that patients and nurses can assess complexity using tools that have comparable structural properties. They also reveal congruencies and discrepancies in scoring the components of complexity, highlighting the need of reaching consensus in designing care plans. Further work is needed to demonstrate the benefits of joint assessment in developing care plans that truly meet patients’ needs. Trial registration The fraXity study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03883425, on March 20, 2019.

Exploring a career pathway for home support workers in Ireland: a systematic scoping review of the international evidence

“…More specifically, studies in the USA and Norway reveal discrepancies in assessing working conditions, scheduling and hours, pointing to the need for standardisation of assessment tools, and improved client data and organisational data collection, and communication regarding the organisation of care and the impact on occupational health outcomes ( 259 – 263 ). Planning tools and work optimisation models can help to assess care plan complexity, revealing congruencies and discrepancies in employee skills and capacity ( 264 – 266 ) and redesign work so that it supports staff recovery ( 267 ). Other research emphasises reorganisation of care and new roles for societal needs ( 268 , 269 ) as well as building in time to deliver interpersonal sensitivity ( 270 ).…”

L’idée des capabilités de Sen pour concevoir l’agir complexe de la pratique infirmière

“…Cet agir n'est pas circonscrit à l'in rmière en elle-même. Il comporte plutôt des émergences imprévisibles, source de solutions nouvelles ou innovantes en termes d'engagement politique des in rmières ou de développement d'approches collectives et collaboratives pour la santé (1,2). L'agir complexe est alors porteur d'agilité pour les in rmières qui s'activent pour la santé des gens, dans une diversité de contextes (1).…”